Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Compliance Staffing To Shucked Off Contractors: Drop Dead And Go Starve In The Street!

Over a hundred people worked for the massive 3+ year World Trade Center litigation in the Wall Street area for Compliance LP/Patton Boggs. After the end of the project was announced for the first week of October, they kept extending it for an additional week, an additional 3 days, another week etc. In that time people were lining up other projects to jump to off as they could.

Well guess what....now that some of them are coming off their projects and signing up for unemployment benefits, Compliance is contesting ALL of the claims saying that everyone quit before the project ended! That's right, work for 3 years and get dicked around on the end date and then NO BENEFITS FOR YOU. Of course the end date announcements and revisions were always verbally announced so no one has documentation to contest their unemployment denial. DO NOT WORK FOR COMPLIANCE!!!! DO NOT WORK FOR COMPLIANCE!!!! Especially since those turds are offering a new gig at $28 an hour!

144 comments:

1. Is Compliance contesting the benefits of people it is laying off ?2. Or the benefits of those who jumped to another project before this project ended? It can't contest these people as it is not the last employer. I thought only the last employer could contest.

It's not even worth working anymore in this country. Constant rat race of kissing recruiter ghetto ass to land a gig, slaving away in miserable basements, and then to top it all of having stunts like this pulled when you finish up.

Drop out of life, get on food stamps/Medicaid/Section 8, and do drugs until you die of a drug overdose.

Compliance should have to pay the unemployment claim. These people did in fact work there for 3 years. Love how they try to pawn their unemployment liability on to other employers by whittling down the hours to bear subsistence levels.

If you worked for say Hudson, then for whatever reason work for HireCounsel, and then HireCounsel lays you off, then it is the manner of separation from Kelly that matters to the unemployment office. It shouldn't matter what happened with HC (earlier employer).

THE FIRM PARTNERSHIPS HAD RECORD PROFITS LAST YEAR!!!!!!! THESE "TEMPS" WERE WORKING THERE FOR THREE YEARS. WHY ARE THE TAXPAYERS PAYING THE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS WHILE FIRMS ARE REAPING IN BEST-EVER PROFITS???

11:54 - It should matter. From the way I understand it, the employer that is responsible for the increased unemployment tax liability is the one that let the employee go at the time of the filing of the original unemployment claim. Since many of these people had been working at compliance for years, it would have been their original claim.

Seems like Compliance juiced down the hours and tried to scare everyone out of the project so they wouldn't be responsible for the claims. Maybe I am wrong.

Actually taxpayers do not pay unemployment benefits. The private emploer is required by state law to pay into the States employment insurance fund, just as a requirement of doing business in that state. Taxpayers may pay for welfare, af/dc benefits or disability but to my knowledge yaxpayers dont get the bill unlesd maybe the fund goes bankrupt. Im not sure why an ageny would protest because it is required to pay into the fund regardless of who leaves their employ.

All the unemployment funds are basically bankrupt. You can add that to the deficit along with the billions of dollars in student loans that will ultimately be forgiven under IBR. And who can't forget about the AIG and bank bailouts. Outsourcing and toilet school expansion are a great recipe for American success.

So when is the revolution going to start?! I suppose as long as people have football, nachos, and beer to keep them entertained, nothing will ever come of all this mess.

Start telling your kids the truth at a certain age, i.e. "You cannot do anything you set your mind to. ANYONE who tells who such nonsense is either a damn fool or is blowing smoke up your ass. The good-paying jobs are for those with the right connections, or those who can invent things (which, incidentally result in less need for human workers).

The jig is up. Hopefully, we can at least convince a few people to avoid law school - so they can at least have a shot at a decent life.

In NY if you lose your job for no fault of your own )ou are entitled to benefits.

Thus if you work for compliance for 3 years and jump ship to Peak that fires you after 2 days, you still collect.

Many employers contest UE claims. Its not a big feal, you just need to attend a brief hearing to state your case.

I had to do and I won. So take the hearing and be prepared. You should win if you were eventually let go. Challenging benefits happens all the time. This is grownup stuff, stop whining and have the hearing. If you win, you will get all of the weeks you missed.

Jeez. I'm not surprised. I signed up for unemployment at the "conclusion" of the WTC project, in Nov., then took the holidays off. There were some "valuable" reviewers "secretly" kept on. This was a big joke to most of us. I'll bet those are some of the folks now being denied UC benefits. I would have to agree with the conclusion of the post, unless you have a family to feed...

Fuck Compliance and their $28/hr job. Their rates have always been low, even b/f the recession, but that's crazy. Their on-site facilities have 2 bathroom stalls for males/females each, which are filthy and often nonfunctional, for around 200 people. You must work in absolute silence (I saw someone get yelled at for asking a question about an announcement a supervisor made when she was out of the room). The kitchen is one fridge and microwave teeming with germs and dirt.

1:02 is right. I have never had a claim contested [worked with all the big agencies] but I have worked with people who have. One girl I worked with had hers contested by a previous employer and she had a hearing. She said the Dept. Of Labor is not all that stupid and they were pretty fair to her and listened to her story in a very calm and rational manner. They said most people win their claims as the DoL knows fully well employers try to shirk their responsibility and screw workers. Only problem is it may take a while to get through the hearing and then you will probably get the benefit in a lump sum.

Nando, I used to think you were okay, but you've become increasingly more bitter than you were last year. This is not a good quality.

You aren't clear (or straight out contradictory) in your advice to parents. Tell their kids to that "you cannot do anything you set your mind to" and that only rich people succeed in life? Yet encourage them to take math and science classes? Which one is it? What if they want to be a scientist? Do you encourage them and tell them they can? Or tell them they probably wont' make it as a scientist but tell them to take the math and science courses just for kicks? Teh reality is that few pre-med undergrads actually become medical doctors. So you'll just encourage none but the rich ones to pursue it?

I hate to bring back the whole optimism versus pessimism thing again, but a lot of the disenchanted lawyers out there have swung way too far into the pessimism side. If your kid wants to be a doctor or a rocket scientist, encourage them to be that. Even if the odds are rough. even if they don't wind up being exactly what they want, they'll still have gained important skills in the process.

Telling kids to just "give up" is not an appropriate course of action here. Nor is starting a "revolution."

The Department of Labor is very fair, and they are all too aware of the slimy tactics that these bottom feeders use to try to shirk their responsibilities. Shame on the "noble" profession of law to allow these middlemen bloodsuckers to get away with such ghetto behavior by skirting the spirit and intention of the state labor laws. I wouldn't be surprised if that bitch Lamm signs off on another resolution to outsource even more work to the third world hovels so the biglaw royalty can avoid these claims altogether and enjoy even more obscene profits.

I don't understand why anyone would think any employer would pay one dollar more than they can get away with, especially when dealing with an oversupply and when hiring temporary employees who are bound by (= stuck with) a code of ethics to do a competent job. With this overlying the whole thing, the motivation is to pay as little as possible, whether by the hour or as to unemployment.

Just received this from the NYSBA -- I have to laugh! They did nothing when that turd Mort Zuckerman started with the nonsensical, biased and non-scientific rankings of universities, grad schools and professional schools, particularly law schools. Now that this rag is going to start ranking law firms, there is a sense of urgency because it clearly will go to the firms' bottom lines. You should note that they say NOTHING about law school rankings, meekly accepting that that ship has sailed....

Dear Member, Esq.:

The New York State Bar Association is constantly striving to meet the needs of our members and to enhance the image of the legal profession. In keeping with the major theme of my tenure, "Lawyers Helping Lawyers," I wanted to update you on an issue of great importance to practicing attorneys and prospective law students.

Recently, the American Bar Association (ABA) adopted a State Bar-sponsored resolution directing the ABA to examine efforts to rank law firms and law schools. The resolution was spearheaded by Association Past President A. Vincent Buzard, and the State Bar's Executive Committee voted to support its sponsorship. The resolution stemmed from efforts by U.S. News & World Report, working with Best Lawyers, to survey law firms and their clients for the purpose of publishing national, state, and local rankings of law firms.

While such rankings may present a new opportunity for the publishers to increase circulation, any effort to distinguish between the abilities of law firms and to rank them raises significant issues for the legal profession and for the public. We anticipate, based upon prior experience of the U.S. News & World Report’s ranking of law schools, that there will be significant issues regarding the validity of rankings for law firms. Two recent studies have noted the inherent "flawed methodology" and "significant random error" characteristic of attempts to rank law schools.

If the rankings are flawed, then lower ranking law firms and lawyers will be unfairly penalized. Further, the public will be ill-served by inaccurate rankings should they be misled into acting on erroneous information. These issues need to be carefully studied, and the ABA would afford the structure required for such in-depth review and careful analysis.

The issues presented by the ranking of law firms are quite urgent. U.S. News and Best Lawyers are currently surveying firms and lawyers across the country, and have stated that they will complete their surveys by April. We are requesting immediate action from the ABA because once the rankings are published, it will be too little too late to address any flaws in the rankings.

Lawyers, law firms and the public must be protected, and New York lawyers are encouraged to use caution in deciding whether to provide information for the purpose of ranking law firms until the ABA has provided information upon which lawyers can make informed decisions.

The State Bar Association is steadfast in its commitment to advocate on behalf of each of our 77,000 members and to speak out on issues that affect the legal profession. This is just one example of how we are using our voice to protect our profession and to help lawyers better serve their clients.

I went to work last year 2009 and took whatever little scraps I could get. That screwed me over as opposed to had I NOT worked. My base period high quarter earnings were fantastic but I did not qualify on that year as I did not make half that amount in the other quarters - missed it BY JUST $500!!! So I could not get the $405full rate in New York. However because I took some mealy projects in 2009 I qualified based on alternate fucking year which means I get $50/week!!! Had I not worked last year at all and sat on my fat ass and eaten ice cream all day and giggled at Oprah I would not have qualified for alternate year either and would have gotten extensions on my old claim. And those extensions would have been for the full $405!! So either go big or not at all. It does not pay to do small gigs....I am fucked. And all those high quarter earning sin my base year are now garbage and do not count towards anything.

People, Dantzler will lose..loet him try. The real issue is that there is no business e.g. market conditions. He probably has the Dutch firm holding company pressing him to do this (Dutch are generally very very penny pinching, and wheeler dealers fiscally e.g. reputations as such in EU. So Randstad is losing money big time, and screaming about the outflow of monies that Dantzler told them wouldn't happend - arguing to the Dutch not to worry, everyone will get jobs. On the other hand, as Hellerstein is under alot of heat, as well as PB on the amount of attorneys fees and lack of claimants paid, Dantzler must tread very very lightly or there may be many temps who will be down speaking to the NYTs about their opinions and perceptions of how that project contributed to the loss of monies being paid to claimants.....I smell a very very ugly outcome in this, and Dantzler may learn a very big lesson here....The Randstad attorneys probably counseld him on how to handle the way he gave notice, but the problem is that the NL/US employment and labor attorneys can try all they want - they will lose, and the fight is NOT worth it if the reputations of PB partners and associates are on the line, and there would be attorneys on the project ready to call a press conference. I predict someone will try, and happen to know several who will not think twice in doing it......stupidity to do what he is doing....he'll end up all over the NYT's and then get sued individually.....someone should discover the identity of Randstad's US law firm, and start from there.....

Oh Father Eamon how your words comfort me as I sit and make a budget for $50 a week - after being SCREWED by the State's alternate year. Please make regular appearances - I need some calm words in this time of trial as I am sure others do too.

Here's an idea: Let's find the email addresses of some editors at US News who are involved in this project and email them our temo horror stories. After all, we're the "front lines" and infantrymen in the litigation wars, the "ground troops" if you will.

To prove we've worked at X or Y firm, we could submit redacted pay stubs to the editors.

After all, shouldn't clients know that Paul Weiss pays temps $21 an hour to work in cockroach infested basements? How about SullCroms pay cuts, rampant disorginzation, ghetto staffers, and general shitshow of an operation? How about the Jones Day gestapo.

A few lines about the awful pay and 3rd world working conditions could really be effective. After all, the goal is to sell magazines, and "scandals" like the treatment of temps fit the bill nicely. It also speaks directly to the "quality" of work these dumps churn out. A few tales of Clovester, Big Mama, Shitfingers, and the Huron Witch could really kick some of these dumps in the teeth.

6:34 Sire, yes it is I. Thanks so much for your past information. After hearing your story I took heart and went to Target. I stood there for a few minutes looking around and finally lost the nerve. The Target in my area in NYC is pretty ghetto. Everyone seemed nasty and overweight and slow. I then walked to Duane Reade where I observed the weasly manager flirt with randy Latinas. It was pretty gross and I wasn't even sure he would give me a job - I wasn't as pretty or young as them and nor would I flirt him - if anything he'd probably get a tight slap and a kick in the nuts if he even looked at me with those low-class eyes. Desperate and broken I decided to concentrate my efforts in the legal field although my prior efforts had not borne much fruit. People were weird here as well - but in a more controlled way. I landed an interview and am almost 99% confirmed for a lowly legal job - still it's a proper office and hopefully there is some decorum. But you well know these cheap recruiters. They can pull the rug from under you any minute. I am just waiting for that call saying "Oh hiiiiiii that position has been put on hold". We all know what that means. Well, I suppose should it come to that I shall be back Target summoning up the courage to work with people I spent most of my life trying not be like.

L4L - I am a huge fan of your work. If you need any more info. on Big Mamma and Clovester and Valvina - and all the slimy characters I am happy to provide. Lord knows I have posted here enough about the GHETTO FREAKS in the basement!! Grossola!!

I think it was probably for the better that the Target or Duane Reade thing didn't work out. Sorry for calling you a "guy," I guess I didn't think about the possibility of you being female.

Good luck with your legal position. If it helps, things happen, and in a split second, your life can turn out for the better. No promises though.

As for you having worked in your base year and having that backfire, I'm sorry to hear that, but if it helps, I do believe that was the correct thing to do as opposed to sitting on the couch watching tv and eating ice cream.

At the time, it must've been the correct call. There's no way you could've known that congress and Obama would extend the unemployment deadline past Dec 31st. If they hadn't, and you sat around doing nothing, then you wouldn't have made all that money you did on your high quarter, and your benefits would end. (I know the timing would be different and you might've been able to hook onto tier one in October or whenever, but then you'd eventually end after tier one, and tier one would've probably been less money total than your high quarter. You also seem to have made some money in other quarters. It was the right thing to do at the time.) You wouldn't even get the $50/$75 for a new claim, it would just be zero. So in a way, it was the right call. You just can't predict these things. Don't beat yourself over it.

Maybe a better idea is to bring Kevin up on Ethics and Disciplinary charges somehow, creative out of the box pleading and thinking, before NYS licensing authority, also go to ABA, NYSBA, and ABCNY - make his life personal you know what....he can not hide behind Randstad, particularly when it is possibly his own lack of business skills in running this U.S. subs of the NL company in NYC properly.....wonder if the raises those people should have gotten went into paying for his luxurious cruise/vacation he took allegedly (hearsay) before he returned to the the fraudulent drama on everyone on that project.....Kevin probably has the most to lose on this one...he is an attorney and allegedly worked as an attorney for NYC Law Department...pssibly there are NYC agencies under Bloomberg that could help...what an absolute idiot...he is hussling Randstad Dutcho owners into thinking it is another problem rather than himself, merely to save his and Sharon's jobs.....Very transparent....losers if this is the case.....

Are you highly motivated and looking for a great paralegal opportunity in downtown DC? A nationally recognized corporation providing diversified insurance and financial services is seeking a corporate legal assistant/paralegal. Some responsibilities will include maintaining corporate records, providing meeting assistance, and responding to requests for corporate information. Competitive salary will be offered and full benefits are included. This position will truly be a valued in-house resource for their team! The ideal candidate will have 3-10 years of experience as a corporate paralegal with a concentration in corporate governance and compliance. Additional requirements include excellent verbal and written communication skills, along with prior experience in research and budget planning. A college degree with an insurance background is also preferred, but not required. If you are interested, please submit your resume today for immediate and confidential consideration to traklegal.info@traklegal.com.

I have a friend who has not one, not two, not three, but FOUR master's degrees from prestiggy-ous schools, including an MBA from U Mich, and has been unemployed for almost two years. He was laid off from an I-banking gig in 2008. He's very naive and thinks the economy is gonna improve really soon, that's why he's hanging around Silicon Valley repeatedly applying to companies like Google, Yahoo, LinkedIn, etc. I keep telling him it ain't gonna happen, and that the longer he stays unemployed, the harder it'll be to find any job, no matter what his qualifications are.

Homelessness in rural and suburban America is straining shelters this winter as the economy founders and joblessness hovers near double digits — a “perfect storm of foreclosures, unemployment and a shortage of affordable housing,” in one official’s eyes.

“We are seeing many families that never before sought government help,” said Greg Blass, commissioner of Social Services in Suffolk County on eastern Long Island.

“We see a spiral in food stamps, heating assistance applications; Medicaid is skyrocketing,” Blass added. “It is truly reaching a stage of being alarming.”The federal government is again counting the nation’s homeless and, by many accounts, the suburban numbers continue to rise, especially for families, women, children, Latinos and men seeking help for the first time. Some have to be turned away.

“Yes, there has definitely been an increased number of turnaways this year,” said Jennifer Hill, executive director of the Alliance to End Homelessness in suburban Cook County, Illinois. “We’re seeing increases in shelter use along the lines of 30 percent or more.”

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s annual survey last year found homelessness remained steady at about 1.6 million people, but the percentage of rural or suburban homelessness rose from 23 percent to 32 percent. The 2009 HUD report, which reflected the 12 months ending Sept. 30, 2008, also found the number of sheltered homeless families grew from about 473,000 to 517,000.

Greta Guarton, executive director of the Nassau-Suffolk Coalition for the Homeless on Long Island, led a recent group of about 40 volunteers to scour vacant lots and industrial parks for this year’s HUD survey; results are expected in several months.

“One of the things that we’ve noticed is a lot more unsheltered, mostly men who claim this is the first time they’ve been homeless, who indicate that it’s due to a loss of wages or loss of job, because of the economy,” Guarton said.

Fighting cancer and homelessStephanie Hawkins, who lost her manager’s job when a shelter for drug addicts and alcoholics closed last summer, is now among about a dozen or more “guests” living in a different kind of Long Island shelter — this one for women who have nowhere else to go.

“I lost my job and I lost my home,” said Hawkins, 44, fighting tears. Her issues are compounded by a cancer diagnosis that requires chemotherapy. “I lived where I worked.”

This type of downsizing has been the trend since the 1980s. Those of us in our 50s were the laboratory rats for these types of employment tactics, which these black-souled employers shrug off as a twisted status quo: make everyone a VP, so you don't pay overtime; make everyone work 39.5 hours per week so they won't be full time; create bogus pensions, fire the employee before it vests and keep all the money; ... do I really need to go on?

I would never have entered law school had I not fell victim to these things.

Meanwhile, the hardball-players instigating this stuff believe they are in the right because the meritocracy has made them overlords of society--they are the only important people in America.

Good luck, new generation. You'll need to do a lot more than just bitch about this.

That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!That's what you get for going to a third tier law school loser!

Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.

Ha, ha the funny thing is that after I felt Target, Duane Reade and Rite Aid were too sleazy for me - the only place I thought I could work was at the local Walgreens. The people there seemed older, nicer. And had my new low level legal job not come through I was planning to go to Walgreens this weekend! It actually seemed the nicest out of all these chains. Oh well now I will be a clerk at a law office than at the drugstore.

Sheeeiiiittttt!! EP Slime tried the same thing on me. Best believe I went for my hearing AND won. They blacklisted me after that but eff them. That's back when Sean worked with them. Bunch of "shysty" bastards!!

Why not just get a new job and forget the unemployment claim? Oh, that's right, thanks to Bush and the obstructionist Republicans no one can get a job and once you lose the one you have, that's it for you! I'll bet Compliance gives big time money to Republicans and probably even has Karl Rove and John Yoo on the payroll as consultants on how to screw as many people as possible while getting rich themselves. The devastation left behind my Bush and his cronies will be with us for years to come.

Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.Really 330PM, that sucks, guess the jokes on you buddy boy.

14% socially retarded Asians:-- 10% formerly-known-as 'Oriental' (before 'Oriental' mysteriously became an ethnic slur some time in the 1990s)-- 4% over-achieving South Asian (mostly Indian females who are so neurotic they no longer get their periods)

The remaining 21% are white males:

-- 15% are effeminite homosexuals, doing the bidding of the white females mentioned above (who feel "comfortable" around them because they don't stare at their T&A in the office and will gosspip with them)

-- 6% white males who wouldn't have looked out of place in BigLaw from 1920-1980. (These 6% bring in all the business.)

Of the above total numbers (excluding the Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians), 75% are Jews, leaving the remaining 25% divided amongst the several Gentile nationalities.

Hey moron, will you quit with the "Martha Stewart" reference? It makes no sense at all and exposes you as a semi-educated jackass. Read and learn: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Gilder.html

By DAVID BROOKSPublished: February 18, 2010One of the great achievements of modern times is that we have made society more fair. Sixty years ago, the upper echelons were dominated by what E. Digby Baltzell called The Protestant Establishment and C. Wright Mills called The Power Elite. If your father went to Harvard, you had a 90 percent chance of getting in yourself, and the path upward from there was grooved in your favor.

Since then, we have opened up opportunities for women, African-Americans, Jews, Italians, Poles, Hispanics and members of many other groups. Moreover, we’ve changed the criteria for success. It is less necessary to be clubbable. It is more important to be smart and hard-working.

Yet here’s the funny thing. As we’ve made our institutions more meritocratic, their public standing has plummeted. We’ve increased the diversity and talent level of people at the top of society, yet trust in elites has never been lower.

It’s not even clear that society is better led. Fifty years ago, the financial world was dominated by well-connected blue bloods who drank at lunch and played golf in the afternoons. Now financial firms recruit from the cream of the Ivy League. In 2007, 47 percent of Harvard grads went into finance or consulting. Yet would we say that banks are performing more ably than they were a half-century ago?

Government used to be staffed by party hacks. Today, it is staffed by people from public policy schools. But does government work better than it did before?

Journalism used to be the preserve of working-class stiffs who filed stories and hit the bars. Now it is the preserve of cultured analysts who file stories and hit the water bottles. Is the media overall more reputable now than it was then?

The promise of the meritocracy has not been fulfilled. The talent level is higher, but the reputation is lower.

Why has this happened? I can think of a few contributing factors.

First, the meritocracy is based on an overly narrow definition of talent. Our system rewards those who can amass technical knowledge. But this skill is only marginally related to the skill of being sensitive to context. It is not related at all to skills like empathy. Over the past years, we’ve seen very smart people make mistakes because they didn’t understand the context in which they were operating.

Second, this new system has created new social chasms. In the old days, there were obviously big differences between people whose lives were defined by “The Philadelphia Story” and those who were defined by “The Grapes of Wrath.” But if you ran the largest bank in Murfreesboro, Tenn., you probably lived in Murfreesboro. Now you live in Charlotte or New York City. You might have married a secretary. Now you marry another banker. You would have had similar lifestyle habits as other people in town. Now the lifestyle patterns of the college-educated are very different from the patterns in other classes. Social attitudes are very different, too.

It could be that Americans actually feel less connected to their leadership class now than they did then, with good reason.

Third, leadership-class solidarity is weaker. The Protestant Establishment was inbred. On the other hand, those social connections placed informal limits on strife. Personal scandals were hushed up. Now members of the leadership class are engaged in a perpetual state of war. Each side seeks daily advantage in ways that poison the long-term reputations of everybody involved.

Fourth, time horizons have shrunk. If you were an old blue blood, you traced your lineage back centuries, and there was a decent chance that you’d hand your company down to members of your clan. That subtly encouraged long-term thinking.

Baxter Davenport III, partner here. Yes, it's true back in the day we ruled law and finance due to connections. We all came from affluent WASP backgrounds, golfed, played tennis, went to Ivy Leagues and prep school together, spent late night summers drinking in Nantucket, sailing. Often we got drunk and sick together, raped the same girls. Our bonds were strong - we knew each other, our families knew each other and everyone who mattered was married to each other. That's how we built business - on contacts, on social ties, on give and take, on certain societal mores. Now you have all these nerds with all this technical knowldge but they DON'T KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE and they don't have any connections!!! They are good at sitting at a computer and banging out some shit - but they do not know how to manage, soothe, lubricate and cultivate people. That my friends is where the real work comes in. Dealing with all kinds of people, kissing their babies, putting up with their ugly wives, dealing with their problem teenage children over weekend on country estates or weddings and dinners. I wish it was as easy as sitting in a boardroom or at a computer. Although we hire everyone, many will just serve as mules. Our partnership ranks will always just be open to those who understand our backgrounds and can cultivate with ease the kinds of people from whom we get business. Blacks and hispanics and jews are welcome - but the problem is many of them just do not have finesse.

It's not really 70% female associates in the major firms. Just look at a few BigLaw rosters and drill down to associate level. It's still mostly males.

A lot of these young female associates "think" they want to be lawyers but really end up practicing law for a few years, then get married, have kids, and stay home for a few years. By the time they get sick of taking care of their babies, they've lost interest in practicing law in the BigLaw setting. If they go back to work, it's usually as in-house counsel somewhere, or for a non-profit.

On the other hand, I work in the government setting and I can tell you that MOST government lawyers in their 20s and 30s seem to be women. It's really a dramatically skewed ratio in the federal government. Seems to be something like 6-7 out of 10 younger government lawyers are women. This is where all the female law school graduates are going -- not BigLaw. BigLaw still wants people who will bill like 2400+ hours/year and most young women, when they get out of law school, even if they're coming with stellar academic credentials from decent schools, either don't want to do this, or can't.

The women who got good grades and BigLaw jobs, but don't know if they want to practice BigLaw, are taking opportunites away from males who got pretty good grades and know they want to practice in BigLaw, and who want to make things happen.

All these women are in the way. If your goals are to get married and have kids, then why not just do that, instead of clogging up the jobs?

Well, a lot of women who go to law school are seeking "validation" of their intellectual abilities and worthiness as persons, just like women also crave validation of their physical attractiveness. The two needs are closely related. For a long time women had were able to have the second kind of validation, but not the first. Women also have a biological need to fulfill their roles as mothers, which is an outgrowth of their need to be validated as attractive, but goes much beyond that. So that's why they drop out of careers for marriage and motherhood.

It's a "hierarchy" of validation, so after one level is fulfilled, the woman doesn't feel the need to go back and return to a career to "revalidate" that need. The only reason she might return to practicing law is economic necessity.

Men are simpler creatures, we merely walk through life in a linear fashion. We don't really have steps or a hierarchy of validation needs -- it's all kind of mushed up together. That's why a man can have the same goals and needs at 25 as he has at 65.

Why censor the truth about the group that controls finance, the media, and the entertainment industry (starts with 'J') that still claims victim status, even though they're in control, Tom? Or is L4L back in charge here again?

Yikes, have you seen some of the women in BigLaw?? It's good we give them those salaries and they can get work done. You should see them when they first interview with us. Some even have moustaches. There are a few cute ones we keep on for a few years - mostly as eye candy and/or to be our lovers. The bloom of each flower fades, however, and after a few years they must be laid-off and replaced with fresher versions. Ugly Betty's have a higher chance of succeeding as they don't catch our eye and there are few emotions involved.

As to query regarding if Compliance "got back" to anyone yet? Interested in understanding the context of the question. Are you implying you haev not received UE benefits bc/ of Compliance or are you implying you are awaiting clarification of if you have another job with them? Why are you relying on them for anything for purposes of survival.....move on and find an income stream, it won't be due to anything done for you from Compliance.....

Where is everyone?????Does everyone have the SWINE FLU??Is everyone at TOWN HALL MEETINGS???Is everyone printing money at the FED???Are they snowed under by SNOWMAGGEDON????Where is everyone???? Whatzzzz going on????

Am I the only one concerned about the state of affairs in Templand???? Where is everyone????

Women and the LAw.... from which did planet did some of these writers emerge. The fact is we are no differently situated from our male counterparts from matters such as intellectual ability, ambition, motivation, goal orientation, need to contribute economically to our individual welfare and that of a partnership, and the need to have savings in our own right separate and distinct from our partners...the fact we are mothers is both a secondasry and a primary role, and is in no way a contradiction of wanting and needing to be in the labor force.....have you ever lived in Europe where a majority of mothers oftentimes have Ph.Ds, fulltime jobs, have social benefits owed them for their own contribution (notr derivatively from their partners and spouses)...please get a life......40 years of women working hard and there is no way an idiot such as yourself can turn back the clock...you must have problems with alpha women....that is the real issue for you.

I wrote one of the posts on women in the legal profession, and yes, not only have I lived in Italy and Switzerland, I was born in Italy and had girlfriends from Denmark and Hungary, so I spent a lot of time in those places, too.

Of course I know that Europeans get a much better social safety net than Americans do... it varies from country to country, but throughout Western Europe (especially from North to South), there's much better social safety net in terms of child care, health care, educational subsidies, etc. In fact, Denmark blows the USA away by virtually subsidizing people's entire careers in whatever field they want to enter.

I do think that men and women are alike in most fundamental ways with respect to basic human urges, BUT the fact remains that men and women are biologically different, their brains are literally wired differently, and hormones (from the prenatal period) influence the actual structure and neuronal distribution of the brain (I also spent 2 years in medical school before quitting and going to law school, so I know...)

However, with respect to urges such as careers, the "biological clock", psychological makeup and hierarchy of needs there are basic, fundamental DIFFERENCES between men and women that statistically cut across the gender divide and leave most men on one side, and most women on the other, with the numbers of outliers being statistically INSIGNIFICANT.

Don't think you're being a "feminist" by stating otherwise or trying to deny what is true. The brand of feminism which preaches that the two sexes are basically the same psychologically, emotionally, etc. has been totally DEBUNKED by most scientists, and is only held as a myth by a few old-school feminists these days, who have no grounding in biology or neuroscience.

And I say this as someone who is politically liberal and progressive. There is absolutely no connection between progressivism and the kind of obsolete "feminism" that you preach, i.e., that the "personal is the political" in gender (sexual) relations. Utter bunk! The two sexes are very different, like it or not!

Do you know how many well educated PHD and MBA students are unemployed and struggling to keep their families and homes together? Stop crying over $30 an hour + OT and benefits. I owned my own practice, overhead is killer and isn't worth it. These companies are paying for the space in NY, sales people to get us jobs and staff to process the apps. If you are so smart, go get us some jobs and I'll work for you if you can pay more than $30 and promise consistent work. In the meantime stop wining and come to terms with the fact that work is slow, you aren't helping!

What we are watching is the slow-motion disintegration of the American Middle class and the unraveling of the prosperous post WWII US economy that we have all known and loved for the past 50 years. This is happening because politicians want only to listen to the people paying them, i.e., big corporations pursuing their vested interests (i.e., outsourcing, offshoring, credit card scams, loan scams, suprrime lending, putting poisons and toxins in our foods, etc.. -- the list goes on...) The same politicians don't give a rat's ass what individual citizens say, unless you happen to be a CEO or other power player with a fatcat corporate donor. And that is why America is unraveling before our eyes.

It's a slow-mo train wreck, but the vast majority of Americans, even highly educated ones (like us, supposedly) are too stupid, uninformed, economically and financially illiterate, incurious, or wrapped up in our own personal affairs to grasp what's going on.

Women and the LAw and "debunked" feminism....It seems to me you are missing the real point.....regardless of inherent differences, each should have equal opportunity to earn equal income and to strive as fiercly to remain independent financially...and to in no way be dependent upon anyone except themsevles as to their financial and economic well being....gender differences should not be determinative of economic survival...the last thing any smart woman would do is subject herself to the choices and judgment of another human being, particularly of men- bc/ those specific gender differences will always bode against her interest, by the gender specific logic of men...sorry bud..the point is economic survival and there is no way those gender differences should force any woman out of the workforce or from any career....you can use academic logic to prove your point, but not to effect women's freedom, and remaining out of the workforce and a career is the first route towards economic and emotional suicide.....particularly if you are relying on men.....you must have gone to an all boys Catholic school or spent 8 years in a seminary, or didn't have sisters, or a mother who worked outside of the home full-time by necessity.

Medicine has the same problem in terms of retaining female doctors. And yes, it is indeed a waste of resources, especially with affirmative action and quotas in play to guarantee a high number of females in law schools and medical schools (both actually have more females than men, look it up).

If anybody has options they'll generally take the best one for them. An attractive young woman will generally want to have a work/life balance and maybe some children, society caters to those wants so it is generally an option. That is why it is overall rare to see women work 100+ hour work weeks or stay in very stressful situations. But there are still quite a few that do, because the numbers we're dealing with are so large.

The real problem is that with so many women working, and men having always had to work, wages are severely diluted and the number of positions available are very small. I don't know that for law specifically even if we cut down 50% of the attorney base, that we'd have decent jobs available for everyone. But doubling it certainly did not help matters.

I'm not advocating against it, since that would be selfish of me, I'm just stating a reality. It's not like it's great for anybody. We just have too many human beings right now, and the US standard of living was too high. Things like that can't last, you can't have a society where everyone is doing well.

Neither group cares. Those of us in the first group have these discussions with real people instead of ranting on some site. And the second group- obviously- is too dense and racist to participate in anything of depth.

10:54 Thank you. So true. I just want info on Templand!! I know it is bad out there - AND THAT'S WHY I AM TEMPING!!! I don't need people to tell me how tough it is - I KNOW!!! Please take your deep discussions elsewhere.

Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.Law school was the biggest mistake of my life.

REFORM THE LEGAL PROFESSION BY CUTTING BACK ON LAW SUITS ----> RESTORE COMMON SENSE AND HUMAN VALUES TO AMERICA ----> SAVE BILLIONS ON HEALTH CARE COSTS ----> THE ***PROGRESSIVE*** ISSUE OF THE DECADE:

US Legal Support is part of Dine Group. Or perhaps it's the other way around. They are two different companies. They are the company that actually sends the checks. Looks like they also do court reporting and other stuff.

Looks like they were going public in 1997: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1046600/0000899243-97-001871.txt

(Reading the filing, it appears US Legal is the parent and EP Dine is the sub.)

Thanks to Oprah - a fat lesbian who hasn't yet dared come out of the closet - many women think they can have it all: a career, a husband, and a family. They used to think they could have them all at once, but now they realize they'll have to do them one at a time, with some overlapping, of course.

Mother Nature (a female!) decided long ago that women would have one set of biological motivations and desires and men another. Women by nature aren't 'independent' - although there are a few outliers and contradictions to this generalization, the generalization is true in the vast majority of cases.) Women aren't happy being 'independent'. They're wired to attract a man who can protect and provide for them and their offspring. They're reliant on their 'girlfriends' to feel a sense of belonging, with whom they gossip and chatter incessantly about every trivial topic imaginable; even when they hold law and medical degrees and doctorates, they still gossip and chatter like peasant washwomen.

100 years of feminism doesn't change 1,000,000+ years of biology. Sorry, feminists. How about you read some books rooted in the biology of the sexes, rather than books on what "feminist theory" has to say on the topic? (In quotes because "feminist theory" books should be in the Fiction section, since "feminist theory" isn't rooted in reality.) You can start with "The Female Brain" and "The Male Brain," both by Louann Brizendine.

Get out of the way, ladies, and let the men do what they were put here to do. Use your innate skills to attract a mate who will be a man and allow you to fulfill your role as a woman, which is secretly what you want to do, anyway - even when you're sitting in a meeting room with your navy blue power pantsuit, you're dreaming about being home, relaxing, eating bon bons and gossiping with your girlfriends. Just admit it already and stop this charade.

Hmmmmm....... Economically-speaking, look how well China is doing. And note how hard they try to get rid of their female babies. They're tripping over themselves in desperation to give their baby girls up for adoption, most often to well-to-do, white Americans.

Even though China is full of shit in most regards, I think they have the right idea: girls are generally useless, except for sexual & procreative purposes. They're a burden. This doesn't change when they get into the workplace, especially the professional workplace, where they want to be a respected professional and a pampered woman & mother at the same time. They require so much more maintenace than men: maternity leave being the biggest burden on employers: spend all this time and effort training and integrating the woman into your business structure, only to have her get pregnant and have to take leave, then have half her mental energy on the kid once she's back at work, rather than on her job.

oh- woops- 10:22 was my target. And I'm guessing by the stupidity of his comments, probably everyone else's.

I've seen your kind- you're one of those fat 50-something white males bitter about your bazillionth divorce, right? Well, next time choose a decent woman of substance instead of some plastic trophy mail-order wife. Oh wait- decent women won't have some"thing" like you, right? They probably want someone who doesn't need Viagra to get it up.

10:46, I get laid plenty. The reason? Because I don't kiss women's asses. I treat them like women, not like fellow men. Nor do I put them on a pedestal. Women seem to like when a man treats them like a natural woman, paying attention without paying too much attention and without treating them like they're too special. (I've been told by woemn that this is a huge turn-off.)

"Treating them like a woman" doesn't mean insulting them or abusing them. It means acting like a man - slightly rough, not over-sensitive, not trying too hard to be "friends" - and knowing the natural differences between men and women. I know the different goals that nature has in mind for the sexes, and I mysteriously get laid fairly often and have several different women who enjoy my company because I know how to act like a man and I demand they act like a woman. I know how to take charge and lead them into the experiences they enjoy (and I enjoy).

I do not date or otherwise get involved with female attorneys. I find they've lost their feminity along the way in very essential ways, and they don't allow me to take the lead in the way that's natural and comfortable for a man. I have no time for such silly power struggles; these women have a lifetime of spinsterdom to look forward to.

Here's another important point: women are naturally hypergamous. Look that word up - I know you're not too smart. OK, I'll save you some time and explain.

Hypergamous means women naturally seek a man with a higher status than them, whether it be financial, social, or career-wise (or all three). The reason for this ties into security issues; a man with a higher status will be a better provider, as well as being a 'challenge' to retain (women like challenges and are very competitive in the mating department.) Also, women want a man they can admire and 'look up to.' Just like a man gets hooked by a woman's physical attractiveness, a woman gets hooked more on a man's status and prowess at his chosen career or whatever he's doing. I've even heard that normal women are disgusted at the sight of a naked man's body, whereas men wish they had eight eyes and twelve hands when an attractive naked women is present. By "Normal women." I mean non-porn stars or "party girls."

So, who's the stupid one? Me or you? You can't refute my arguments, so you have to resort to insulting my sex life?

gFemales do better in school at all levels than males, not because they're more intelligent, but because school is more suited to the female temperment than the male temperment.

This starts in grammar school. Boys are figity and want to run around, play football, tackle each other, disrupt class, and otherwise display the effects of testosterone flow. Girls, on the other hand, are more willing and able to sit still, listen, and please the teacher, who is almost certainly an adult female, since 99% (or some high percentage) of grammar school teachers are females. Yes, there are some outliers - energetic girls and sit-still boys - but I'm not letting that distract me from focusing on the great majority.

Since the boys are unmanagable for the female teachers, the boys' behavior is pathologized as "abhorrent" in some way, and the parents are pressured into having Ritalin or some other horrible drug prescribed. These drugs retard emotional and psychological development in children, and the vast recipient of them are boys, since their display of natural behavior as boys has been pathologized by the huge majority of female teachers and feminist NEA.

This progresses through the education system, where girls consistently do better in the aggregate than boys.

Just a tangent, but relevant to the discussion of why there are so many women doing well in law school and getting top-paying jobs.

However, just because you were a good student doesn't mean you'll be a good lawyer or real-world problem solver. I think men have the advantage in the problem-solving department as well as in the inventing department. The technology I'm typing on and everything associated with getting this message out to you was invented by men. And men also provide the muscle in this society, building and maintaining the roads, sewers, electrical system, and other vital pieces of infrastructure. Women could presumably do these things in 2010, but still choose not to; they don't have the physical capacity to keep up. Men are stronger, faster and have more endurance than females. Nature intended it this way. Men keep society thriving.

I believe men have been devalued in an effort to promote the value and worth and 'equality' of females. Equality being relative: men and women are different and have different strengths and weaknesses, but that doesn't make them 'unequal.' it makes them NATURAL.

Are there any temp jobs going down out there, separate from occassional 10 person teams sent in for 1-3 weeks? I have not heard of one, and have been scouring all sources re friends, colleagues, blogs, hearsay, networks, gossipp.

Even as a 60's feminist, I am totally in agreement that men have gotten the short shift in the last 40 years. In fact, I think there should be a very agressive effort to address his matter, and particulary so by the NYC Board of Ed, so called, "Czar" e.gh. Klein. If they were truly committed to the future of NYC and this country, one of the easiest solutions where they could begin is to take all of Roosevelt Island and turn it into a Struyvesant III, but devoted to math engineering,, science,IT and vocational tech skills/careers, bring in Ph.D. level (or pursuing) professors from the globe (U.S., Asia, Europe, Russia, India etc.), pay them extremely well, and assure that although it is open to everyone (male and/or female) that entry is based on testing/merit......not affirmative action merely to meet a quota, but rather talent, intelligence, and actual merit...and assure the tuition is low (if any) or tied directly to a % of parents' income...therefore, even those from wealthy parents could attend( although their parents will pay a hefty fee) and those from poverty level could attend (even if they lived in a shelter or SRO)..the issue is do they have the innate smarts...not "smarts" as dictated by someone's grade inflation system, that can be addressed by the private fee tutoring classes available only to those that can pay that hefty fee...it has to be a testing that bypasses the usual suspects of measuring, but is considered accurate as to cognitive skill, innate intelligence (across various modalities), and talent. It is what they do in Europe and in many European countries...all merit and skill.

Oh, and to 12:55- hookers don't count in your so-called sexual exploits. Many 'feminine' attorneys, as you put it, are happily married. Are you? Nope. And don't try to argue there- because we'll know you're lying. There is no woman in the world who'd put up with a bastard like you.

Speakin of men and women I just heard that a 60 year old lady in NYC got raped by a 18 year old man - what the fuck??? The guy told her he was a virgin and had never been laid - he must have been really desperate. I would never go for a grandmother - poor thing. She is in a bad state.

Listen Mr. 9:29 back in the day I had plenty of opportunity to marry rich and lay around in bed eating bons bons and gossiping like a fishwive - AND I DIDN'T!! You know why because that is a DISEASED lifetyle - I had many friends who did that and over the years they got SICK in the head. I like being on my toes and staying fresh and working as though there is no safety net. And I have met a lot of women/lawyers who do the same in NYC - just to stay alive and challenged. I guess you could stay we are the "energetic" girls. Many of us are not bad looking so we didn't HAVE to chose this lifestyle - we did it so that we wouldn't end up weird like our girlfriends who lay around all day.

Would someone please answer the most pertinent question re are they any projects out there in NYC beyond 10-14 days. Word has it that business is so bad that Tradwell is trying to put together gigs down south in Charlotte, running ads on the Atlanta Posse LIst.....expanding his market bc/ there is nothing at all up in the northeast?

There is hope...little but there is...I suddenly lost my unemployment benefits, then was going to work for Target/Duane Reade, now I have two job offers, both with whiny people, but still ...now I have to chose...it's happened to me before...I've gone from eating paper to having several job offers...I wish things would be more consistent...still I am alive and grateful...[for now]

I HATE the Saddlebag Queens. They are crafty and manipulative and I always get kicked out of an assignment because of them - because they DON'T work and when I say something they scream racism. Bitches!!!

They all claim to have "a man". Please I highly doubt it. Now these chicks are working because NO ONE WILL HAVE THEM!!! I hope Mickey D's put some arsenic in their drinks one day and they ALL pass away!!! and the rest of us can go back to a decent professional life without these hookers!!!

First off let me start with a intro. Im a tier 4 grad. I knew in 2007 that the economy would crash and I also knew the job market would be tough. What I didnt know about was how the ABA allows law schools to lie about their employment stats. I should have figured that as I never trusted the data out of the Labor dept, FDIC, the FED, treasury, etc. Just recently i stumbled upon these blogs and i feel your fear and anger. I cant imagine what it must be like toughing it out in this market with no financial support from family. God bless your souls. You guys have been through hell. Its a shame that legal educational institutions prey off the young adults of this country for their personal greed. This country is destroying itself by using the young like this. The social fabric is being torn everywhere, from the usury and fraud preyed upon subprime mortgage borrowers to subprime graduate school grads (mba, jd).

So to my situation. I have no student loans, i live at home with my parents. My car is paid for, as is my insurance, phone bill, basically everything. Im very fortunate to come from a wealthy family that owns restaurants and properties. I know that its nearly impossible for me to get hired in SOCAL, the place of 22% unemployment based on the U-6 measure. I have a huge network of businesses but only a few in legal services, all of them being partners in biglaw, jobs i know i cant get and jobs that i dont want anyway.

So im thinking about partnering up with a buddy, whose also a jd and mortgage broker. He's got a steady pipeline of short sales, debt restructuring, commercial and residential. I have a large pipeline of immigration work. My family owns 9 restaurants you get the point. My uncle also owns a office building so I could rent for free. In addition, I have been meeting with commercial vendors that have millions in outstanding recievables. If i can get the agreements to pursue these collectibles the $ potential is huge. Im thinking of hiring a seasoned attorney and give him a great bonus incentive. The question is: would it be a bad idea for me to go small time with a partner buddy considering my special circumstances?? Our practice areas would be collections, bread and butter PI, real estate, some criminal. Thoughts and feedback.

Again, i feel terrible that so many of my fellow JD's are suffering so badly. Fu+k these scam artist law schools. Its a shame that this has happened. I hope the situation gets better for you all but with 45,000 new JD's coming on the market the unemployable backlog of JD's will cause even more pain and suffering as the JD becomes more and more diluted.

6:48, I work out 4 times a week and I'm in very good shape. But I'm still an Evil White Male Fatso Who Doesn't Get Laid in your mind's eye because I express a valid opinion that you disagree with? And it seems "getting laid" is your criteria for "coolness." How Fast Times At Ridgemont High of you, moron.

Such sweet words you speak. You're right- of course, you're the Ladies' Mmmmmman! What was I thinking? Ladies LOVE temp attorney dudes who sit around and bitch about and curse at women on a blog all day. So cool. Cooler than Ridgemont High, as you so aptly put it.

PS- Um, I use the 'laid' analogy because I know your type- that's the only language you speak. Talking with you in a polite way that promotes gentle debate, is kinda like telling a KKK member that blacks are people too. See where I'm going with this? I don't "argue" if that's what you would call responding to your blatant hatred, because it's not worth it. Your evil mindset is beyond that. BUT, I bother to respond at all only because monsters like you need to know that not everyone is going to put up with your shit, so take it elsewhere.

Thank you. I'm done here. I've got to cleanse myself now after being among the trash.

The idiot who disparages women on this blog (calling them "peasant washwomen", etc.) is sick. Doesn't he have a mother, sisters, girlfriend, etc.? Isn't there any woman he likes or respects?

Men who cut down women like that have serious self-esteem issues.

Nonetheless I want to reiterate the points *I* was making about the very real differences between men and women.

One thing that guy said that was right is that today's women want to have it all.... love, career, and family.... but they get surprised, frustrated, angry and often nasty, raising spectres of victimization, when they find out they can't have all those things at once, and society "conspires" to make them have one at a time, often being forced to give up one of them to have the next.

To that, I say: stop playing victim, stop whining, and GROW THE FUCK UP!!!!

It's not males or "patriarchy" or sexism or even misogyny that is forcing you to sacrifice one of these things for another, but simply fucking REALITY.

To those females who want to have their cake and eat it too -- having all the benefits of being treated just like men, same access to career opportunities, jobs, business deals, etc., while at the same time, keeping all the traditional benefits of being a woman -- lower income expectations than your male partner, staying home for a while while raising infants, and -- in dating -- passively waiting for the men to take the risks and face rejection, not to mention expecting men to pay for meals, date activities, entertainment, etc. -- then GET A FRIGGIN' LIFE, will ya?

The only reason today's American women "want everything" is because our comfortable (but manipulative) capitalist society has programmed them to EXPECT everything.... simple: HIGHER EXPECTATIONS MEAN MORE SPENDING, and that's exactly what capitalism wants!!!

Most countries are either not as comfortable materially, or are more traditional socially, or both. Even in Europe, as modern as they are there, women don't expect to be treated just like men. Their expectations for so-called "equality" are lower, and they are naturally more comfortable with being women, as opposed to a completely empowered clone of a man who just happens to have boobs and a uterus.

We in America have created an artificial society with artificial expectations and only now, in a crushing recession (which by the way is the first harbinger of the permanent decline of the US)... only NOW things are starting to change.

Just wait ohhhh, about 10 years from now when jobs are even more scarce, and males are literally fighting you for jobs.

(And by the way, before you call me an unemployed whiner, I am anything but... I know you might find this shocking, but I haven't been unemployed for a day since I first started following this blog exactly a year ago -- Feb. 2010 -- and I am not in temp jobs, either, but full time attorney jobs that pay well, considering the current climate. I realize that's immaterial to my post, but it's just a "disclaimer" for the record in case the trolls chime in with their predictable and boring accusations.)

No one yet has answered question regarding if there are ANY projects out there or if anyone knows if there are some planned after law firm numbers and in-house GCs get their authorizations after end of 1st Qtr analyses e.g. mid-April round-up possibly....Heh, they can't postpone litigation forever, unless they are arbitrating or using in-house associates to do doc review....but at some point, that has to change too..Pray Tell, anyone out there?

I think these wannabe bloodsucking lawyers who are getting their own blood sucked are hilarious. On the bright side, I hear that several of them are quite overweight and could get by on their fat for quite a few months - a benefit of sorts.

this is all making so sick. i have no income for months went to all the usual new york bullshit agencies. where their pretty employees promise the world, pretend that they have projects thay dont exist or that they are merely competing for, and pretend that the projects will be starting. i call creditors and relatives tell them im starting. now they think i am a liar and dont believe a word i say.

compliance were big ones - had the project in their hand - then sent me an email that clearly illustrated they were merely vying but because they had identified the law firm as fried frank had to be all so cryptic (dishonest) in the email so that i wouldnt tell the firm.

then there is sara kim at yorkson who put out a contrived "conflicts list" that clearly applied to labaton as it featured all the Labaton cases but she passed it off as a paul hastings gig.

messing around with professionals playing with lives, they really should be held accountable.